One of the methods of getting 'movement' is to focus on the difference between the provocation and the way we usually do things. What is the difference? Where do we go forward from that difference? People who have to deal with ideas soon develop ways of rejecting ideas because not all ideas can be used and any new idea has a large element of risk attached to it. Outright rejection of an idea is difficult if the idea does have some merit.
There is also the motivation factor. If all new ideas are quickly rejected, then people stop having ideas. There is another danger in outright rejection. There is a need to give reasons for that rejection: cost, practicality, cost of change, etc. If the rejection of an idea is based on specific reasons, then modification of the idea to overcome these reasons should mean that the idea can be used. At this point it would be difficult to go back and find other reasons.
You can always say that the idea is indeed 'good', but does not have sufficient value to warrant a change from the existing method. It now comes down to assessing future values, which is not always easy.
People who have to assess ideas have learned that the simplest way to reject an idea is to claim that it is not new at all and therefore does not merit any attention. The phrase 'the same as...' is possibly the most effective killer phrase of all: 'This is really not different from what we are now doing...This is just what we used to do in a slightly different way...The concept is the same as the one we are using'.
It is, unfortunately, very easy to claim that something is the same as something else. If you go to a broad enough concept level, similarity can be claimed for things that are really quite different. It could be claimed that 'a horse is the same as an aeroplane' because both are methods of getting from one place to another. At a broad concept level this is true, but in practical terms the two are rather different.
CONTRADICTORY FUNCTIONS
The answer to such a claim is: 'Yes there are some similarities but let us focus on the difference.' Even if the difference is only 1% that may be a very significant 1%. There is only 1% diffence between the DNA of a man and the DNA of a chimpanzee (that is why chimpanzees have better manners!).
For very practical reasons, the human brain has two contradictory functions. One function is to lump things together and to treat as similar things that might be quite different. This is a great help to learning and to behaviour. Instead of having to learn in detail about each member of a class, you just learn the general characteristics of the class and simply recognise something as a member of that class - with all the implied characteristics. You can now treat all breeds of dog in a similar way instead of having to study each individual breed. There can be no doubt about the practicality of this behaviour.
At the same time there is the opposite behaviour. The brain is good at noticing differences. The whole development of medicine has depended on noticing differences between different illnesses. It was no longer enough to say that someone was 'sick'. Just as it was useful to treat all dogs as 'dogs', it is also useful to note differences. Some dogs are more vicious than others. Some dogs have a better sense of smell. Some dogs are more loyal, etc.
It is never a matter of doing one thing or another. There is a need to do both at once. We need to be able to focus on similarities and differences at the same time. A new idea may indeed be similar to an old idea, but there may be a fundamental difference in the value offered. The similarity of the new idea to the old idea reassures someone that there is little risk in using an idea that has been shown to work. The difference in value delivered means that it is worth trying out the new idea.
A cigarette that is slightly shorter than the normal size may seem attractive to people who feel they want a 'short smoke'. Whether the smoke is actually much shorter or not doesn't matter as long as the value is perceived. The difference between a shorter cigarette and a cigarette that you could easily put out becomes a matter of cleanliness - not to mention the taste of old smoke.
DECISIONS
There are usually different alternatives whenever we have to make decisions. There may be a different course of action or simply the choice between action or inaction. In order to make the decision or choice we need first to focus on the similarities. Do all the alternatives offer the same fundamental benefits? Then we need to focus on the differences.
One alternative may be more expensive than the others. One alternative might be easier to implement. One alternative might have longer-term effects, etc. It is usually easier to make a decision by finding out why you should not choose one alternative than by seeing why you should choose one alternative.
LUMPERS AND SPLITTERS
Scientists are often divided into lumpers and splitters. The lumpers take a broad view and show that different phenomena are really related and governed by the same basic principle. This allows us to extend our range of understanding and knowledge. The splitters take a more detailed view and show that what was regarded as similar is actually different.
For a long time a green and a red parrot in Australia were regarded as two differenct species. Then it was realised that they were the male and female of the same species. The Australian Koala looks like a bear, but in fact belongs to a totally different species.
DIFFERENCE AND NEW IDEAS
There is a practical convenience in finding out that different things are really similar. As a result of this our actions are more appropriate. We can deal with a complex world in a more effective way. But it is from focusing on the 'difference' that we are more likely to generate new ideas. The difference may be a matter of detail or it may be a fundamentally different concept. Both birds and aeroplanes fly, but the concepts used are different in many respects. A voice message on a mobile phone is similar to a text message in many respects, but also different in some key respects. Maybe some central voice recognition system could translate voice messages into text.
Is a price reduction the same as offering two items for the price of one? If the price reduction is 50% there is no financial difference, but would the purchaser then buy two items? Probably not. So the two items may be more attractive than the price reduction - unless price is a key issue.
The emphasis on difference is always related to the search for value. What new values arise from this difference? It may be that with one idea there is more value for one particular group and with the other idea lesser value, but for a wider group.
Looking for difference should become a habit. The intention, however, should always be practical and constructive. It is not a matter of looking for difference in order to reject an idea, but rather in order to build a new idea. Surface similarity may hide fundamentally different concepts. At the same time, surface difference may hide fundamentally similar concepts. The creative mind explores both possibilities.
read all 70 gurus with one feed read all Read all media
